PROTON STRUCTURE HISTORY
By Prof. L. kaliambos ( Natural Philosopher in New Energy) July 7, 2015 After my published paper "Nuclear structure is governed by the fundamental laws of electromagnetism" (2003), based on the discovered quarks by Gell-Mann and Zweig, today it is well known that the new structure of protons and neutrons is given by proton = + 5d + 4u = 288 quarks = mass of 1836.15 electrons neutron = + 4u + 8d = 288 quarks = mass of 1838,68 electrons That is, in my discovery of the nuclear force and structure considerable charge distributions in nucleons due to the 9 extra charged quarks in proton and to 12 extra charged quarks in neutron interact electromagnetically with strong forces of short range for the correct nuclear structure. Historically, after the experiments of Rutherford (1911) it was shown experimentally that the nucleus of hydrogen (proton) carries a positive charge = +1e = 1.6/1019 C, and has a mass of 1.6726/1027 Kg with an intrinsic spin quantum number I = ½. Moreover in my paper of 2003 I showed that the spinning proton because of its intrinsic magnetic moment ( g = 2.793 ) is rather a spinning oblate spheroid having a complicated charge distribution with its positive charge ( + Q = +8e/3 ) existing along the periphery and its negative charge ( -q = -5e/3 ) existing at the center. Under this condition for proton we have (+8e/3 - 5e/3 = +1e). In the same way I discovered that neutron has a charge distribution with a negative charge (-Q = - 8e/3) existing along the periphery and a positive charge (+Q = +8e/3) existing at the center. That is, for neutron we have (-8e/3 + 8e/3 = 0 ) However after the discovery of the assumed uncharged neutron by Chadwick (1932) physicists believed incorrectly that neutron has no charge distributions and such a wrong idea led to the abandonment of electromagnetic laws in favour of the development of fallacious nuclear theories and models. In fact, the neutron does have a magnetic moment g = - 1.913. It may seem strange that an assumed uncharged object has a magnetic moment. We should bear in mind ,however, that even in classical physics the absence of charge means only that the integral of the charge distribution vanishes. For example a spinning oblate spheroid that carries a negative charge (-Q) along the periphery and an equal positive charge (+Q) at its center will have a negative magnetic moment and zero net charge, because (+ Q - Q = 0 ). Although the protons and neutrons account for nearly all of the observed mass in the universe, these particles have a complicated structure. The first indication that nucleons ( protons and neutrons ) have an internal structure was a measurement of the proton magnetic moment, which led to the 1943 Nobel Prize being awarded to Otto Stern. According to the experiments a very small particle like the electron, has a magnetism (magnetic moment) with a magnitude g = -1 which means that the spinning electron has the negative charge -e along the periphry. But for the spinning proton, we observe a positive g = 2.793. Thus, the proton has an internal structure with a charge distribution. In the quantum mechanics, the probability of scattering an electron from the proton is directly related to its charge distributions. The investigation of the spatial structure of the proton was led by Stanford experiments in the 1950s, for which Robert Hofstadter was awarded the 1961 Nobel Prize. Measuring the charge distribution of the proton with finer precision requires measurements at higher momentum transfer, but as the momentum transfer increases electrons scatter increasingly from the magnetization, rather than the charge, of the proton. As a result, the magnetization distribution is well known at large momentum transfer. In the 1960s, Akhiezer and Rekalo, and separately Dombey, proposed that polarization observables could be used instead of scattering probabilities to precisely determine the charge distribution. With the spin of an electron beam oriented along its direction of motion, one can either measure the spin direction of the proton after the scattering, or the variation in the scattering probability as the spin direction of a polarized target is changed. By 1960 the study of protons and neutrons, which was expected to clarify the nature of nuclear force, had instead spawned a bewildering array of particles whose production and decay modes defied understanding with the framework of existing models. In the late 1950s and early 1960s various schemes were proposed and then discarded with disconcerting regularity. The grouping of these particles led to the so-called quark model proposed independently by M. Gell-Mann and George Zweig in 1964. In other words the first understanding of the proton structure came from the quark model , which describes the proton, and other subatomic particles, as being made up of 3 massive quarks. However Quantum mechanics requires incorrectly that in addition to 3 valence quarks there be quark-antiquark pairs, a meson cloud. Under such a wrong hypothesis the structure of the proton, when probed at low momentum transfer, appears to be dominated by the fallacious meson cloud, based on the Yukawa wrong meson theory (1935). Historically the discovery of the assumed uncharged neutron (1932) along with the invalid relativity (1905) led to the abandonment of electromagnetic laws in favor of wrong theories which could not lead to the structure of proton and neutron. Under this physics crisis in 2003 I published my paper “Nuclear structure is governed by the fundamental laws of electromagnetism ” by reviving the natural laws which led to my discovery of 288 quarks in nucleons including 9 charged quarks in proton and 12 ones in neutron able to give the nuclear binding and nuclear structure by applying the well-established laws of electromagnetism. (See my papers of nuclear structure in my FUNDAMENTAL PHYSICS CONCEPTS ). ' DISCOVERY OF 9 CHARGED QUARKS IN PROTON EXISTING AMONG 288 QUARKS' Although in my published paper of 2003 I discovered 9 charges quarks in proton and 12 ones in neutron, able to give the nuclear structure by applying the electromagnetic laws, today physicists influenced by the WRONG STANDARD MODEL based on the invalid relativity and the various contradicting nuclear theories continue to believe that the proton is composed of 3 quarks with fallacious gluons which cannot lead to the proton structure. So in the “Proton-WIKIPEDIA” one reads the following wrong ideas: “In the modern Standard Model of particle physics, the proton is a hadron, and like the neutron, the other nucleon (particle present in atomic nuclei), is composed of three quarks. Prior to that model becoming a consensus in the physics community, the proton was considered a fundamental particle. In the modern view, a proton is composed of three valence quarks: two up quarks and one down quark. The rest masses of the quarks are thought to contribute only about 1% of the proton's mass. The remainder of the proton mass is due to the kinetic energy of the quarks and to the energy of the gluon fields that bind the quarks together.” Under this physics crisis in my published paper of 2003 one can study carefully my discovery of the 9 charged quarks in proton, because the fallacious gluons of the quantum chromodynamics lead to complications. Since the two up quarks of the WRONG STANDARD MODEL lead to complications, let us analyze carefully the following experimental relation of the proton having mass M in case in which it spins like a spinning disk. μ/S = 2.79278(e/M) Note that according to the deep inelastic scattering the negative charge –q of the proton is limited at the center. Then taking into account that the uniform charge distribution of the two up quarks of the wrong Standard Model cannot justify the above relation we may assume that the positive charge +Q exists along the periphery. Also in this case the charge distribution of +Q = +4e/3 cannot justify the above relation. Under these difficulties one may assume that the integer number n of real charged quarks is greater than the number 2 given by the theory of quantum Chromodynamics. That is, n>2 where n = 3, 4.... Under this condition +Q = nu = n(+2e/3) According to the electromagnetic laws the magnetic moment + μ of a disk spinning with a frequency ν and having the positive charge +Q along the periphery the magnetic moment +μ is given by +μ = + Qν πR2 = n(+2e/3) νπR2 where R is the radius of the disk. Whereas the spin S of the disk with mass M is given by S = 0.5 MωR2 = 0.5M(2πν) R2 In other words the above experimental relation can be written as μ/s = νπR2 / [ 0.5M(2πν)R2] = + 2.79218(e/M) But in this relation the n cannot be an integer number when the proton behaves like a spinning disk.0.5M(2πν) R2 In a simple discussion the picture of the proton could be as a rather oblate spheroid associated with the spin having a factor t characterizing the shape between a sphere and a disk. Since a spinning sphere of radius R and mass M has S = 0.4Mω R2 we can say that 0.5 > t > 0.4. Under such a reasonable assumption we found that n = 4. Then the above experimental relation can be written as μ/S =4(+2e/3)νπR2 / tM(2πν)R2 = 2.79218(e/M) or 8/6t = 2.79218 Thus solving for t one gets t = 0.47742 In other words according to the experiments and the applications of natural laws we see that the proton is an oblate spheroid which has 4 up quarks (4u) with +Q = +8e/3 existing along the periphery . Since +Q –q = +1e one concludes also that a negative charge - q = -5e/3 exists at the center. Since a down quark (d) has a negative charge( d = -e/3), it means that the proton contains also at the center 5 down quarks (5d). Of course , to describe the structure of the neutron under the (udd) scheme with fallacious gluons one leads to the same complications. So taking into account the symmetry properties of nucleons, that the current distributions with n and p are quite similar and using the same method we found that the neutron (n) has 4u at the center and 8d along the periphery. Then applications of electromagnetic laws by using such charged quarks at the size of protons and neutrons give the experimental binding energy E = -2.2246 MeV of the deuteron. Note that this binding energy rejects Einstein’s fallacious theories of relativity because the binding energy turns into the energy of the generated photon and the so- called mass defect turns into the mass of the generated photon. In the same way in the Bohr model the binding energy of -13.6 eV turns into the energy of the generated photon and the so-called mass defect turns into the mass of the generated photon. (See my BOHR AND SCHRODINGER REJECT EINSTEIN ). It is of interest to note that the stability of proton is due to the structure of proton having 93 quark triads and extra 4u with 5d , while the free neutron is unstable because it has 92 quark triads and extra 4u with 8d. Moreover such extra quark led to the discovery of 288 quarks in nucleons. As a result the proton has 93 (dud) neutral quark triads. Among them there are 4u charged quarks distributed along the periphery and 5d charged quarks limited in the center. Whereas the neutron has 92 (dud) neutral quark triads and among them are distributed 8d charged quarks along the periphery and 4u charged quarks limited in the center. So, the new structure of protons and neutrons gives not only the masses Mn = 939.565378 MeV/c2 and Mp = 938.272046 MeV / c2 of neutron and proton respectively but also the difference Mn - Mp = 1.293332 MeV /c2 which is exactly equal to d- u. That is, d - u = 3.69348645 - 2.40016645 = 1.293332 MeV/ c2 . However in "[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Down_quark Down quark- WIKIPEDIA]' '''and in "[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Up_quark Up quark-'''WIKIPEDIA']" one can see the confusing values as d = ( 4.1 - 5.7) = 4.9 MeV/c2 or a so-called precise value d = 4.79 MeV /c2 u = (1.7 - 3.1) = 2.4 MeV/ c2 or a so-called precise value u = 2.01 MeV'/' c2 'Of course these values in energy are wrong because the difference d - u = 4.79 - 2.01 = 2.78 MeV is greater than the correct value Mn - Mp = 1.293332 MeV. ' Ever since the quark model was proposed extensive searches have been made for evidence of the existence of quarks as free particles. As yet there has been no decisive evidence for the existence of free quarks. Category:Fundamental physics concepts